Georgia Congressional Republicans Vote Against Extending Jobless Benefits

Amid reports that the unemployment rate in the United States rose to 5.5% last month, the United States House of Representatives voted to extend jobless benefits for 13 weeks nationwide and for 26 weeks in high unemployment states – those with 6% unemployment or higher.

According to the Congressional Budget Office, this would provide relief for 3.8 million Americans.

House Speaker Nancy Pelosi lauded the passage of the Emergency Extended Unemployment Compensation Act saying, “The time is right. The number of long-term unemployed Americans is higher now than when Congress last extended unemployment benefits in 2002.

“Extending unemployment benefits has the potential to help the entire American economy,” Pelosi said. “All Americans are feeling real, serious, and deep economic pain. Yet President Bush has issued a veto threat against this legislation – despite the fact that it will help 3.8 million Americans and in fact, the entire economy.”

While all six Georgia Congressional Democrats voted to provide millions of Georgians and Americans with relief in the sluggish economy, the G7 — Georgia’s 7 Republican members of Congress — voted against the bill [Source: House Roll Call 412].

The head of the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee (DCCC) Chris Van Hollen (D – Maryland) had some heavy criticisms for Paul Broun, Phil Gingrey and the other 142 Republicans who sided with George W. Bush’s latest veto threat over middle class families struggling to make ends meet.

“House Republican efforts to defend the status quo and protect George Bush’s and John McCain’s failed economic polices have reached a new low,” Van Hollen said. “Less than one week after the largest one-month jump in America’s unemployment rate in two decades, House Republicans blocked passage of a bill to extend unemployment insurance to workers, who are struggling to find a new job in this slowing economy.

“This is a firm reminder that Republicans are absolutely comfortable with the status quo and are completely out of touch with the harsh economic realities facing American workers.”

31 comments

  1. Why not do things to stimulate the economy like making Bush’s tax cuts permanent, cutting spending, and allowing us to drill for oil here in America?

    Nancy Pelosi promised to cut gas prices two years ago and instead they’ve skyrocketed. Now she just want’s to hand out money to the unemployed instead of helping them get jobs.

  2. Schmidt says:

    I second what Buzz said and would add that the jump in unemployment was because of the flood of high school and college students looking for summer work. I believe I saw that job layoffs accounted for about .004% of the unemployment drop.

  3. John Konop says:

    The scary part of this debate is the falling dollar via debt and trade deficit are driving the dollar in the ground as I warned years ago. Also that is also why we are feeling all the ill affects.

    We have both sides offering band aids from this bill to the gas tax relief bill to a gushing wound.

    The truth is we need to cut spending and renegotiate trade deals that take away incentives to use overseas cheap labor with no real legal rights.

    We also must use the tax code to give incentive for companies to invest in the U.S. and not overseas.

    The concept of using U.S tax dollars for companies moving operations offshore is nuts!

    A race to the bottom with wages hurts your tax base. Which is why we most base our immigration policy on the best and brightest regardless of race instead of cheap labor with no rights and tax payers picking up the social service cost.

    This would create more jobs which would help with the welfare issue.

    I said all of this and more years ago. Now the free lunch is over!

  4. Doug Deal says:

    Buzz and Schmidt,

    Haven’t you guys heard? This is the worst economy in since Bush 41 Carter The Great Depression Panic of 1873. Or whatever hyperbole the Dems will claim this election.

    McCain is just a running for Herbert Hoover’s 21st term.

  5. Chris says:

    and why the hell should I subsidize the frigtards in MI, CA and NY who pass retarded economic policies that lead to their 6% unemployment.

  6. Decaturguy says:

    I’m not saying that I wouldn’t have voted to extend unemployment benefits if I were in Congress, but I’m thoroughly confused by Andre’s ideology, or lack thereof.

    Wasn’t he just a couple of weeks ago railing on and on on this very blog about how government should be living within its means and not spending money it doesn’t have or raising taxes to spend more?

    I don’t get it.

  7. Decaturguy says:

    Today he sounds like a typical Howard Dean liberal Democrat.

    Oh, wait a minute, he is.

  8. I Am Jacks Post says:

    Andre,

    You fail to mention that the Dem’s bill makes radical changes to long-standing unemployment benefit policy.

    Under the Dem bill, one would be required only to have had a full time job for two weeks (instead of the old policy of 20 weeks) in order to qualify for full benefits.

  9. John Konop says:

    Clint

    % is not the real #. I think it started in the Clinton years but they use creative accounting to come up with the #. Part time jobs count as full time jobs. Also if person does not find a job after x amount of time they stop counting them. Also illegal immigrants count as employment but not as people since they are not here via the government. Also Illegal immigrant tend to have many part time jobs with fake SS #s. The number was like 12 million around 4 years ago.

  10. Jane says:

    Make it legal for unemployed Americans to sue the employers of Illegals for Job discrimination and if the Employer of Illegals has a pattern of hireing illegals over citizen, allow for RICO charges. That will free up 10M new jobs for American citizens.

  11. Goldwater Conservative says:

    Buzz, you need to go back to school.
    Konop makes some extemely good points, but I need to add that government regulation of the private sector is a must.

    I know you are going to disagree, many of you will. I do not advocate state-ownership by any means, but the market is not responsible to consumers, their own employees, and in many cases the shareholders (speculators are the real concern). We are talking about 1%-5% of the country that benefits at the expense of everybody else.

    The Bush tax cuts have not stimulated anything, nor will they ever. Drilling in the US will only weaken the US’s future national security. Obama has the right plan for taxation, but if there is anything that is certain…for the nation to get back on track we are going to need tax increases and spending cuts.

    If Buzz actually was a successful American he would know that companies do not move to different countries because of the U.S.’s corporate tax policies…they move there because of the costs of labor. Individual tax rates do not matter at a certain point either.

    The last 20 years before I retired, if taxes went up…I just gave myself a pay raise to compensate. Anybody in the top 5% that does not have the ability to raise their pay deserves higher taxes for not being either 1) intelligent enough…or 2) productive enough to have such a position.

    Honestly, Buzz, what does another $30k/year mean when you (not you literally, you will never make it that far with your opinions and ideology) make $650k/yr. I don’t need another car…not alone some cheap p.o.s. that only costs $30k. Cutting taxes amongst the lower 95% will help a lot…especially if it is on a graduated system (progressive income tax). $1k to a person earning $20k annually means alot.

    As far as capital gains taxes go…I would rather my family get hit with the estate tax than have them pay out capital gains taxes on the assets they inherit. That is what will happen if you get rid of the estate tax you know. All of those assets, when you sell them off…it will all be considered a capital gain. All you would be doing when you get rid of the estate tax would be increasing taxes. Best of all, somehow the Bush administration convinced you that the estate tax somehow applies to you. There are only, what…10 or 20thousand families are even covered by the tax, because family farms and small businesses are exempt.

    Furthermore, I am a firm believer (just like real conservatives) in people’s responsibility to make it to positions of authority and wealth on their own. Inherited wealth is not earned wealth. Just like welfare and unemployment benefits…they are not meant to be a life style, they are only intended to be a safety net. Just for the same reason why one can not become a millionaire doing nothing and leeching off taxpayer dollars, we should do all we can to prevent fat, drunk and stupid rich guy’s kids from running our economy and government (yes, this is a stab at President Bush…and a prime example of what I am portraying.) Bush would not be worth $100mil+ if left on his own…he needed his daddy to become anything more than a failure…he is just a failure with $100mil.

  12. A Typical White Person says:

    ” Drilling in the US will only weaken the US’s future national security.”

    How’s that, Goldwater?

  13. Donkey Kong says:

    I’m taking a step out of retirement to call BS on Goldwater. You were running some big company and you only made $650K? The two guys I sit next to at work both made double that last year — and they are under 30. The 36 year old who sits a few seats down from me made at least 10x that. So either a) you ran a fairly small company, b) you sucked at your job so your bonuses were small, or c) you are full of BS.

    I don’t define success as the size of your salary, but apparently you do (“If Buzz actually was a successful American…not you literally, you will never make it that far…”). By your own standards, Goldwater, you were mediocre at best.

    Furthermore, I am a firm believer (just like real conservatives) in people’s responsibility to make it to positions of authority and wealth on their own. Inherited wealth is not earned wealth.

    Your attempts at social engineering via government taxation is far from conservative. Central to conservatism, and what our founders called an inalienable right, is the right to property. You are suggesting the government strip away our property because they believe that our kids shouldn’t have the fruits of our labor. I have far more respect for those who create wealth themselves than those who can run freely with mommy and daddy’s credit card, but parents earned that money, it is their property, and they have the right to use it as they see fit, even if we disagree with their decision.

    If Buzz actually was a successful American he would know that companies do not move to different countries because of the U.S.’s corporate tax policies…they move there because of the costs of labor.

    So when companies move their incorporation and legal headquarters to the Cayman Islands, they do it for cost of labor? Oh please. If you actually had the corporate experience of which you boast, you would know that taxes enter into corporate decision making as any other cost does — with the goal to minimize it. If a company can maximize their return by relocating overseas, they will do just that. The reasons American companies tend to be inelastic towards tax rates include many factors beyond taxes, including currency (the largest single market of most multinational companies founded in the US is still the US), productivity of American labor, and the deep wells of financing and efficient capital markets (though other capital markets are quickly gaining ground). Unfortunately for US competitiveness, but great for the international economy, other countries have undertaken widespread reforms by cutting taxes and strengthening their legal environment. You are right in that labor costs are a much more common reason to relocate overseas, but taxes enter into this equation as do any other costs, and as other countries continue catching up to the US in terms of tax and regulatory policy and they build strong financial markets, tax policy will become increasingly important in remaining competitive.

    Ok, I’m re-entering retirement. Vote Paul Broun.

  14. John Konop says:

    Donkey Kong

    In fairness to Goldwater 650K is a very good CEO/Executive position especially if he has upside stock for a private company. Most of the private deals are very upside driven and have even lower basis. I have multiple companies in my portfolio with very talented smart people making less than 650k base.

    Also I can only speak for myself and not Goldwater. In general for my industry the 7 figure salary jobs are mainly in NY City. If you make a certain amount of money the life style change for some of us is not worth the move. I am very great full for my training at Citibank but I prefer smaller private companies outside of NY. I have many friends and contacts who work in both worlds and they will all tell you the upside and downside. And as you get older with a family, life becomes more complicated.

    As far as cost labor and taxes are both major cost centers. The truth is if a competition takes a market advantage you are forced to follow. The biggest advantage small companies have is speed to adjust.

    BACK TO THE POST

    The key point I was trying to make is any tax plan without a Pay/Go style controls will only hurt the economy. And it is clear that McCain and Obama fail in this test.

  15. Harry says:

    Goldwater Conservative,

    Assets received in by way of a testamentary distribution receive a step-up in taxable basis. The sunsetting of the Estate Tex exclusion amount (due in 2011) would not be offset by a loss of step-up in basis; that is, not unless Democrats in Congress change the law to get more revenue and Obama signs – a very likely possibility. We’ll likely end up with:

    1) No more step-up in basis of assets received via a testamentary distibution,

    2) Greatly reduced estate tax “applicable exclusion amount”, thus far more estates will pay the estate tax,

    3) Increased capital gains tax rates.

    It’s commonly referred to as “soak the rich.”

  16. Donkey Kong says:

    John,

    My point wasn’t to get into a discussion on the implied corporate position of a $650K salary. Goldwater often brings up that he was an executive, or how much money he made, and denigrates those who are not in the position he claims to have been in, even to the point of saying he/she is not a “successful American.” He uses his status and salary as a way of defining his success and denigrating others, and personally I have no room for that kind of braggadocio.

    Anyway, I have to go back to work. Vote Paul Broun.

  17. Goldwater Conservative says:

    Donkey,

    I am in no way degenerating people who do not make enormous sums of money. I was only one of over 200 vps…one of 30 vps of government affairs. It was part time…as a policy watchdog so to speak. Teaching is my real passion.

    What I constantly slam middle and lower income earners (oh yeah, $650/yr is only upper middle class in NYC) on is that they always vote against their pocket books. The estate tax does not apply to 95% of the people in this country, but for some reason Joe Bob up in Toccoa thinks his $20,000 estate will be taxed to the point that his children will receive nothing. It does not work that way. Furthermore, they think they benefit from the Bush tax cuts. They might benefit from an increase CTC, but that is not an idea conceived by the GOP.

    I am still amazed. I have lived in this country since 1949 and to see what I have seen. Right after the war, people were pretty smart. The Red Scare came through and half of the country became nearly as stupid as half of our modern nation…and all it took was 9/11.

    There are 200 nations in this world, only about 50 of them are really developed and they all have a few things in common. Liberalism. Perhaps many of you should visit the middle east. Hopefully you are young enough for it to be safe again oneday. Dubai is a beautiful nation…it is also a conservative nation. The tax schemes are similar to the ones touted by american conservatives, the social policies as well. It is also a nation of extremes. Extreme wealth and extreme poverty…just like feudal Europe. This was the system that great conservatives (classic liberals) sought to create in the early 20th century. Like the estate tax and a progressive income tax. It probably will not happen this generation, but if today’s “conservatives” had their way…if we handed to country over to them to govern us…95% of this country would end up laboring to keep the aristocracy supplied with wealth and resources.

    Fortunately we have a democratic republic…and sooner or later people will learn that the GOP does not have their interests in mind. The democrats do not have it right either, but I would rather support the party that will help the people 4/5 times than the party that spends it time and resources on focus grouping to deceive the public.

  18. John Konop says:

    Donkey Kong

    No comment on this point I made?

    The key point I was trying to make is any tax plan without a Pay/Go style controls will only hurt the economy. And it is clear that McCain and Obama fail in this test.

    BTW you are doing way better than I did at your age! Keep up the hard work.

  19. Goldwater Conservative says:

    Sorry Mr. Konop. I am fully retired.

    I must say that I do have a tremendous amount of respect for you. I do not really know much about you, but Federalist believed you to be a good man and he respected you…and his word I held in the highest esteem.

    I remember when you ran against Tom Price in ’06. I am not sure which of the GA congressmen will do it because they tend to take turns, but do you think it will be Price that will write the shadow bill on this matter? Or will it be Broun?

    It is disgusting that these GA GOPers play the ignorance of their constituents so. For those that do not know this yet (Buzz) everytime a popular, but slightly moderate, policy comes to the House floor…the GA delegation votes against it as a bloc and usually within a week or two a shadow bill is written by one of them in its stead. Within another month a direct mail piece…I mean a congressional frank letter…makes it to the mail boxes talking about how Tom Price supports childrens healthcare and SCHIP, just look at the bill he wrote…same thing for the economic stimular package, same thing for the new gi bill and I am certain that another will be written for this.

  20. Donkey Kong says:

    The key point I was trying to make is any tax plan without a Pay/Go style controls will only hurt the economy. And it is clear that McCain and Obama fail in this test.

    Completely agree. 🙂

    And Dk with all the money you make you can buy me a drink!

    Hey I’m still just a poor college student.

    Goldwater, I will never look down on those people for dreaming and hoping they will one day make enough to where the estate tax could affect them. I *do* hope that one day they make that dream a reality. Although it never materializes for many of them, I can’t blame them for dreaming.

    It is the natural course of human events for the best and brightest to rise to the top and lead other people in the creation of wealth and implementation of new ideas. The ideal society would not be one where the best and brightest are stifled or punished, which is what you are suggesting. The ideal society is one in which the best and brightest, regardless of whether they are born and raised in the tenements of NYC or the mansion of a millionaire, have the opportunity to reach their potential. We have that in America, and yet populists such as yourself, John Edwards, etc. tout this populist two America BS and act as if we don’t. As a teacher (my mother, father, and brother are all teachers), you should know that some kids are naturally more curious and driven than others. Their ambition, work ethic, and curiousity will be, and should be, rewarded.

    GC, one thing we do agree on is the desolation within the GOP. We are supposed to be the party of opportunity and responsibility, one of limited government and unlimited freedom. We have failed on all accounts.

  21. Harry says:

    GC fails to address the real issue. When you rob Peter to pay Paul, it’s not a rising tide. You don’t lift all boats, you lower all boats. If you subsidize lazy, incompetent, spendthrift people, then you produce more of them and less of the energetic, competent and thrifty. Obama’s policies will result in subsidizing the less desirable element. Bad money drives out good.

  22. SecretIdentity-NotStevePerkins says:

    From the Speaker’s tax schemes, to unemployment benefits… have you ever noticed that whenever someone talks about how many people a policy would provide “relief” for, it’s almost always a dumb policy idea?

    That particular word has starting getting a lot of play in recent years, and it’s almost always a red flag. Whenever someone talks about a solid policy proposal that has merit, they NEVER pull out the word “relief” to promote it.

  23. Goldwater Conservative says:

    The progressive income tax is not a “rob peter to pay paul” system. Taxing higher income earners at higher rates is not punishment.

    It may seem simplistic, but people that earn higher levels of income (whether considered earned income by the tax code or not) require the use of more of our infrastructure to maintain their standards of living.

    I think it is great for people to aspire a better life, but they need to stop digging themselves into a hole to get their.

    “As a teacher (my mother, father, and brother are all teachers), you should know that some kids are naturally more curious and driven than others. Their ambition, work ethic, and curiousity will be, and should be, rewarded.”-you are absolutely correct. Unfortunately we have micro-cultures that exist all of this country that socially deter many of these ambitions you speak of…much of this, I will argue, is not so much natural is in a matter of “nurture.” You are a college student, I am certain that you had to take Sociology 101 and have heard of those two paradigms.

    I think alot of the problems with these debates is a matter of miscommunication. I really hope you know that higher taxation on upper income brackets is not a deterent to aspirations of belonging to that income bracket. If it is…well, then you are most likely clincally insane.

    Responsibility is a big deal for me, just as it was a big deal to the GOPer of the early 20th century. Which is why the estate tax was created. A mention was made earlier that I did not address and that was a matter of the transfer of property. Really, the only transfer anyone is entitled to (this is quite Lockean) is the original value of said property…not the value of what it has become. Furthermore, in agreement with part of what DK said, yes taxation is a small matter in the equation that is a corporations decision to relocate…but again it is amongst the smallest. Labor costs, as well as other production costs, are by far the highest. It is also a matter of what industry the company belongs.

    There is really no reason for manufacturing companies to stay in the US. Nearly all raw materials need to be imported, and labor costs are high…this is not a matter of corporate taxation. We are going through a shift to a service industry based economy. Subsidies are the only things that keep agriculture in the US alive (aside from the production of ethanol to be used as an alternative energy), but many “conservatives” play that nationalistic card and complain about american jobs going over seas…well, there is usually a catch 22 in matters of economics. The GA GOP delegation cares nothing for farmers, only enough to come up with the rhetoric that will allow the payment of lipservice.

    Just like other fledgling economies, the US needs to learn to cut its losses and make the necessary investments to protect our future.

    There is no need to drill for oil, as I mentioned earlier. There are a hand full of oil exporting nations that will be shutting off their pumps by 2010 because their fields are running very low. Syria, for example, will be a net importer of oil by the end of next year…so, they need to beef up their reserves. Political matters in the oil exporting nations have become so volatile that we need to begin making long term preparations. Yes this may mean building the necessary infrastructure to bring our resources online at a moments notice, but we should not begin production until it is absolutely necessary. To put it quaintly, we should finish exploiting everybody else dead-dinosaurs before we start using our own…and if we make the proper investments into research and development we may actually be able to sell our oil to future-former members of OPEC.

    A lot of this comes down to one thing. Education. More federal money needs to be invested in our children and into continuing education for adults. With the economic transformations we have seen we can only be at the top if our kids are smarter. Let the peoples of central asia and eastern europe stare at the gears and gauges of heavy equipment…we are better than that. there are literally hundreds of emerging scientific fields that are the future. We really need to be thinking about the next 25-50 years when there will be no more farms in the U.S., when there will not be any more factories in the U.S….what will we do to maintain any form of sustainable development. It does not mean having every citizen in a lab coat, but it does require every citizen to have the knowledge to provide every service required to make, maintain, retail and distribute in every aspect of these fields.

    That is the beauty of government taking the lead in these matters, there is legitimacy in the use of power as well as its ability to coerce if necessary. Home Depot, DuPont, IBM could care less. Their private contributions are a matter of public relations. The Ga GOP delegation is part of that public relations stunt, I almost admire how Machiavellian it is…but that is just a little bit of Europe still in me.

  24. Goldwater Conservative says:

    Secret Identity-Notsteveperkins-

    You are absolutely right. Relief became the new word a few years ago when we first started hearing it attached to the Bush tax cuts.

    Harry, you are being a little paranoid. The differences between Obama and McCain are not that big. The differences between Dems and GOPers are not that big. Go to europe and you will see differences. Fact of the matter is, we are at a point in America’s history where a good deal of people are going to be lazy. Rich or poor…they are getting lazy. That Trickle-down economics stuff is garbage, so was the economic stimulus package. Unemployment insurance is not garbage though. It is strictly temporary and provides very little. It is a safety net and it has saved quite a few people I have worked with in the past. You should check out Barbara Ehrenreich’s books “Bait and Switch” and “Nickel and Dimed.” More so Baith and Switch, the other was a little biased but still relevant to a large portion of America’s population. What really sucks (if I may use that word) is that modern america has made expendable wh*res out of everybody…and too many people have figured that out.

  25. Tekneek says:

    Extending unemployment insurance will do more to help the economy right now than more oil drilling.

    I’m not sure why we care about pumping up the oil industry anyway. They already receive plenty of tax and fee breaks compared to other industries, while making larger profits than any other industry.

  26. Icarus says:

    Tekneek,

    The fact that you probably actually believe that scares me. The fact that a majority of voters probably agree with you scares me even more.

    Exxon will pay more income tax this year than the bottom 50% of all US taxpayers COMBINED.

    Look at what has happened when Mexico and other countries have nationalized the oil industries. Output has steadily declined.

    Though you didn’t specifically call for nationalization, adding extra tax and regulatory burdens has the same effect.

    Please tell me how extending unemployment benefits to someone who only worked for 2 weeks helps the economy again? I really seek this understanding of how subsidizing leeches who can’t stay employed longer than 2 weeks helps the economy.

  27. Donkey Kong says:

    Geez I just can’t stay away…

    They already receive plenty of tax and fee breaks compared to other industries, while making larger profits than any other industry.

    ExxonMobile had an effective tax rate of 45% in 07. That’s right. 45%, which happens to be higher than the maximum corporate income tax rate of 40%, and which I think was higher than any other Fortune 500 company. So — tell me — where are all these tax breaks you are speaking of? The oil industry is receiving record profits b/c of the insanely high demand for their product, a product that requires extensive long-term capital investment (= risk). That is the way free markets work! Position yourself in an industry where you predict will be high demand, pump in capital investment (and risk), and reap the benefit if your predictions are true. The problem is that nobody expected demand to reach these levels, so the industry did not invest enough 10 years ago when this investment was necessary to begin. Even if they did, the most politically stable market in the world (US) practically outlaws any additional oil exploration, and has for decades, leaving oil companies no choice but to explore in riskier climates. Because the risk is higher, the expected reward must be higher. A good example of the risk necessary is the Venezuelan government appropriating ExxomMobile’s assets. Think about that for a minute — you just invested hundreds of millions of dollars, and the government just says, ok, thank you, leave or I’ll throw you in jail.

    Rather than envying the success of the oil industry, their massive profits should be an incentive for all of us to:
    1) Stop disincentivizing oil exploration in the US — its insane for anyone to think that punishing the suppliers of a scarce good will lower prices. Have we already forgotten the supply-demand relationship from ECON 101???
    2) Notice the profits in the industry and invest accordingly. As investment balloons, supply increases, and the forces of supply-demand and competition will bring prices down

    America should learn lessons from Brazil. There are massive profits to be made in the oil industry. America punishes those who try to reap these profits. Brazil encourages it. Which policy do you think will provide a better outcome??

  28. jsm says:

    “I do not really know much about you, but Federalist believed you to be a good man and he respected you…and his word I held in the highest esteem.”

    Federalist? Are you kidding, GC? You really do need to remove “Goldwater” from your screen name.

    You apparently have not learned the principle that taxing something results in less of that particular thing.

    “It may seem simplistic, but people that earn higher levels of income (whether considered earned income by the tax code or not) require the use of more of our infrastructure to maintain their standards of living.”

    This does not necessitate a greater percentage of a larger income to pay one’s “fair share.” Taxing the same percentage of a larger income draws an equally larger amount which should cover the greater use of infrastructure. Furthermore, too many people who either don’t work or choose to work sporadically for less than poverty wages rake in THOUSANDS each year in tax returns after paying only a few hundred bucks, if anything at all. These people have invested nothing in the infrastructure they use and then get a paycheck on the backs of the “rich” people you want to soak even further. People don’t value something they don’t invest in. Everyone who earns should pay some tax.

    And BTW, the only group whose tax liability went UP due to the Bush tax cuts was the top 20% of wage earners.
    http://www.taxfoundation.org/news/show/323.html

    Also, the US has the 2nd highest combined corporate income tax, yet this results in the 4th lowest corporate tax revenue compared to GDP.
    http://www.taxanalysts.com/www/features.nsf/Articles/FE9DCA58402875D7852573680064DA50?OpenDocument

    Even European nations are getting a clue and lowering corporate income tax.

    No one with a brain disagrees that we need to cut spending and cut it big. We just can’t go raising taxes on the economic engine of this country and expect to raise revenues, pay off debt, etc. It won’t work.

Comments are closed.